How do I become a better writer?
write
>>7578116
I deserve that, I guess I should have asked what could I read that would help?
>"If you dun beleive in muh jebus then you have nothing to believe in."
>"Oh my, I didn't believe in muh jebus and I did horrible things, therefore you are right!"
Why hasn't this cunt been sacked yet? Do people take this reductive shit seriously?
Dosto is a bad philosopher but a 10/10 writer, so he's still respected.
>>7578109
OP here
while we're at it, doesnt it suck how there are barely any women or PoC writers talked about on /lit/? this isn't what I expected from a literary board..
>>7578109
>lunatics like Sartre are allowed to babble about nonsense and be praised
>Dostoevsky uses bad logic but since it regards a religion I don't follow he's automatically a shit writer
What is postmodernism, /lit/?
It is technically the reaction to the modernist movement in literature.
Some people think it's lower quality than modernist literature because it deals a lot with satire and abstract nonsense or whatever, but I enjoy it. I would recommend reading the Crying of Lot 49 for an idea of what postmodernism is.
infinite jest is metamodernism. shit list
the response of all the ideals of modernism being betrayed by itself and a combination of those ideas with a longer understanding of human history product of modern analysis and investigation.
>>7578108
you just said nothing
why do people recommend this shallow trash?
anyone who wants to get in to pynchon must start with V. and go straight to GR, do not read TCOL49, it honestly put me off Pynchon but when I eventually read V. I realized why he is so respected.
>>7578058
I think about V the way your parents think about you: A lifeless soul/money sucking piece of trash that I'll regret forever.
>>7578076
the character or the book
>>7578078
Book.
>You're no novelist!
>I walked Iggy Pop on stage in 2009.
>Who are you!
Your flat
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9E62iA6KCIQ All of /lit/
This dude should act in horror movies. You can just imagine the guy horribly mutilating, raping and consuming a whole gaggle of whores.
lets have another books you think only you have thread
If someone else on this board has it, you lose
>>7577962
What do you lose?
>>7577974
your life
>>7577974
if you lose you have to read a book.
I had a discussion with my uncle, whom I generally think of as pretty smart, but then it turns out that he's pretty deep into the whole "neurology debunks all of philosophy" meme. So the discussion went on about Sam Harris' The Moral Landscape, and the idea of objective moral. So I'm curious, since he couldn't, can someone tell me how Sam Harris' moral philosophy isn't just utilitarianism + "objective cuz I say so"?
Thanks.
you're right it's just utilitarianism, but I would say he's making a reasonable claim by glossing over one that is less certain, but not necessarily wrong for doing so
I think we can all agree that while morality is, if we are going to be strictly logical and philosophical about it, subjective, we can also agree that for practical purposes, much of morality can be treated as shared among a majority of humankind (a lot of the themes are aligned, at the very least)
And I think Sam is mostly motivated by the reasonable intuition that yes, science, specifically psychology and other human focused sciences, is probably very capable of giving us the most accurate way to achieve the prescriptive goals of our mostly shared morality (don't kill, don't steal, respect other people as equals in at least some sense)
I haven't read his book so I can't tell you how serious he is about believing that we can know for certain that a specific moral prescription is objectively true, but I suspect it's not that important to his point
>>7578009
I'm pretty sure he's serious about the objective part. But even if not, I'm still at a loss. I can easily agree that science is a pretty handy tool to decide which way to go in moral dilemmas IF you have a definition of morality ready. SH uses the "maximize weel-beeing" one. He just does, because that's common sense (to him). But science would be eaqually handy if the definition was the "maximize the capabilities of the human race".
Ultimately the definition is the thing in question. Noone (well, noone worth their salt) ever argued that science can't be a helpfull tool for deciding, so his point is either moot or wrong, depending on how serious you consider him to be when talking about objective morality.
>>7578255
>Ultimately the definition of the goal is the thing in question, not which tools to use, to help us decide how to get there.
fix'd
Could someone give me an overview of Tommy P.? Maybe explain some of his recurring themes? Is it all as absurd as Gravity's Rainbow is supposed to be? Pic related is what I have and I'm planning to start on.
I know this isn't the best post, but I hope it's better than endless DFW memeing.
>>7577889
just read him first
Is his writing too complex? English is not my native tongue, so I would like to start reading him with his simplest novel
Trash author
>/soc/ thread
>Slaughterhouse five
>Tolkien
>Neil Gaiman
>Hitchhikers guide to the galaxy
Goodbye /lit/
Hello r/books
I dont care if meta is cancer
Kill this board
same
The /his/ split really did a number on the board, and having a little fresh blood to fuel the machine will make us better in the end.
It will calm down over time, just remember to shitpost in shitthreads and call out cancer where you see it.
whatcha readin OP?
where do I start with this memer?
Genealogy of Morals or Beyond Good and Evil
not memeing: aristotle and plato and schopenhauer
if you go into nietzsche without a bases in at least aristotle and plato you'll never understand anything he says and end up a teenage edgelord
>>7577824
surely for schopenhauer you need Kant as he explicitly says so? Or not
How do I start to read more? I would like to start reading more often. Any tips?
I've found it works well to only read physical books, and set aside time to be "no electronics allowed"
1. pick up book
2. open it
3. direct eyes to ink
4. interpret ink squiggles to meaning
5. do this until book is out of ink squiggles
6. pick up next book
7. see step 2
hard work but you'll get there
>>7577533
Keep your phone in the other room.
Great covers
Good morning/whatever, /lit/.
What book would you recommend me (I consider myself intelligent) to help me become Christian?
I've been a christian before. Then I read about Tantra and Buddhism, a lot Nietzsche, and a bunch of philosophical stuff, and I seem to me unable to believe anymore.
I want an intellectual approach to Christianism.
Kierkegaard
Thomas Merton
The author of the aesthetics of Christian truth: forgot the subtitle and the author. Just look it up on Amazon
Nuanced and intellectual religious authors are the best
>>7577451
This. Kierkegaard is for people like us - Intelligent, Witty, and a wicked sense of humor.
A Secular Age by Charles Taylor
"A man who is more concerned with being a good man than being good at being a man makes a very well-behaved slave"
Why haven't you taken the iron pill yet /lit/?
always been more interested in green pill
>>7577260
I always thought Savitri Devi's quietly disgusted expression on Defiance would make a good reaction image.
Incidentally, Archeofuturism would be better if it didn't have the Eurosiberia story at the end with the holographic totty. Evola is also fun though.
>>7577281
*always fun
Write poems using as many /lit memes as possible.
Hard mode: They have to be good.
Once upon a time I
thought up a little rhyme
and posted it to /lit/
so they could call it shit.
That feeling one gets with no gf
Reading Wallace by the fire.
Awaiting the approaching death
Of literature's turgid sire.
Maybe I'll post in a poetry thread,
Thinking about Pepe Grenouille.
Another chance, before I am dead,
To post another dank me me.
I am the eternal literature pleb
Never posting with flowers
Nothing really rymes with pleb
Maybe I should just post meowers.
>>7577220
bee eee ayyy you tee full
